Mass Media in modern Russia

2.3. Monitoring by authority of regional editions

   When the Russian mass media just started to come to the senses after the shock events of the middle of 90th years, The August default of 1998 burst. Practically on the order the price for paper grew, the advertising market fell. The press again appeared in an economic hole. It was necessary to use the advantage of political forces to buy up mass media, to receive control above them. It’s known, that the control carry out basically powerful political or economic groups. But as the "big" economy is inseparable from a policy and it is necessary to speak only about political control.

     There are the data showing, that in each of regions of Russia there are newspapers (from one and more). From them 67 (79,8 % of regional newspapers) or directly are founded (and, accordingly, are financed) by municipal institutions of local government, or with participation of a share of the municipal property. Nine newspapers (10,7 % from the general number) represent the industrial enterprises or groups of the industrial enterprises. And only six newspapers (7 % from the general number of regional press) are private.

     Thus, if to start with a parcel, that free mass media - the tool of democracy, then in the whole country (not considering mega cities) there’s no more democracy today than seven percent.

2.4. Necessity of changes for sphere of mass media 

   Today the distribution of mass information gradually becomes a unique sphere of enterprise activity (certainly, the question is the notorious seven percent of private newspapers). However in this sphere successful private enterprises are compelled to compete to the unprofitable monsters founded by the state authorities and management. The budgetary funds directed on a covering of losses of mass-media, for example, in Mordovia, can be comparable to charges on all youth policy, all cultures and all sports, taken together. A similar situation can be found in other regions. For example, in budget of area of Nizhniy Novgorod in 2002 it was planned to allocate 36 million 114 thousand rubles on the maintenance of mass media while, for example, on development of physical culture and sports this year the area has planned to exhaust 34821 thousand rubles. And the comparison of charges of the regional budget shows, that, for example, in 2000 on mass media it was spent 947 thousand rubles (the excess from planned was 349 %) while on major overhaul to structures of housing and communal services of area it is allocated 777 thousand rubles (it is financed from the plan of 9,06 % of percent), under clause "physical culture" - 55 thousand rubles (are financed only 20 % from the plan). And at the same time it is necessary to mention, that despite of financial injections, the state and municipal mass media do not consult with the problems, the main of which is the formation of public opinion. Nowadays the state mass media can assert any interests that are necessary to satisfy, but not the interests of the state. Basically public funds are spent for the protection of quite concrete private interests of officials. That one pre-election campaign ИБ lead to the Mordovian mass-media «All Russia» when the only propaganda number of the newspaper «News of Mordovia» was issued by circulation in thousands of copies though usual circulation is necessary in some thousands only.

      There are arguments against the deprivation of the state and municipal mass media of state grants: there should be the newspapers reflecting the point of view of authorities. Journalists of the newspapers, deprived grants, will stay without work. Closing of any mass media is the pressure upon a freedom of speech. At the present stage all the existing and possible arguments are quite fair because there is nothing to object on similar socialist demagogy. The fact, that the state press doesn’t exist in really democratic countries, and, probably, never existed, will not convince officials.

     Grants of the state press are the money, which has been spent in vein. Editorial collectives got used to getting some money state that made them nonprofessional, in editions there is no economic planning, debts for municipal services, rent, polygraphist services grew. The position on the market of advertising is very weak. Popularity among readers is low. In editions there is no elementary management, nobody thinks of minimization of expenses (alternative distribution, minimization of expenses on the stage of preparation, an optimum, flexible, stimulating payment, etc.) As an example it is possible to compare today's circulations of the private and state newspapers. The difference in circulation as a parameter of popularity among readers, confirms everything that was said before.

  Conclusion

   The state policy existing today in Russia in sphere of mass media is inefficient, does not stimulate the occurrence of free, independent editions. Absence of free press as a tool of democracy does not promote development of a genuine democracy in the country, especially on places. Individual independent editions cannot affect in a due measure the deepening of democracy. The system of mass media existing today serves basically the interests of officials, political forces and oligarchs (including the regional level), serves as the tool of struggle for authority, elimination of objectionable contenders in sphere of a policy and the big business. The state and municipal grants in private mass-media brake the development of competition in this sphere, do not promote occurrence of professional journalists and becoming of the market of mass media as spheres of business. The judicial system as a whole is imperfect, that is negatively reflected and in activity of mass media. 

     It’s considered that such actions are necessary for continuation of democratic processes, as:

1. The further perfection of judicial system in the direction of objectivity, legal independence of the state.

2. Privatization in sphere of printed mass media, especially on places. The state program on privatization of local editions, gradual liquidation of the newspapers incorporating founders the state and municipal bodies.

3. The program on preparation in higher educational institutions of managers of mass media.

4. Introduction of competitive system of distribution of budgetary funds to newspapers for the publication of official documents and statutory acts.

5. Universal creation of the unions, associations of free, independent mass media for the joint decision of existing problems in this sphere.

6. Popularization at a federal level of system of free mass-media, the organization in the state scale of seminars, an exchange of experience with mass media of the democratic countries.

7. Revision of a tax policy concerning mass media, prohibition (up to administrative, criminal sanctions) unreasonable pressure upon mass-media on the part of the state, municipal bodies.

8. Encouragement (including the increasing of deductions from the budget of higher organizations) those subjects and municipal formations where creation of free, independent mass media is encouraged.

9. Restoration of the system of operative reaction (to recollect the traditions of Soviet time) on the part of federal bodies and subjects of the Russian Federation on the publication and the message on illegal activity of officials of all levels.

      Under condition of realization of these proposals the increase of efficiency of activity of modern Russian mass media is probably possible. The efficiency of activity of mass media can be investigated and appreciated only in comparison to the purposes that are put by society for these means. The realization of this problem is inextricably linked with more exact account of needs of people, their increased social, spiritual and political inquiries. The attention of sociologists to this aspect of efficiency has already noticeably increased recently.

     The satisfaction of information needs of an audience is necessary for including in number of the purposes of mass media as purpose-means for achievement of other, administrative problems of mass influence. 
 
 
 
 
 

Literature

Arsuken E.. / / Rossiyskaya Gazeta. 27/11/2001. Number 232. 
Vasiliev, AA Governance. The course of lectures. M., 2009. 
Vladimir Voroshilov Legal and aesthetic standards in journalism. Spb., 2009. 
Vladimir Voroshilov The history of journalism in Russia. Spb., 2009. 
Kodzasova I. Who is the TV host. / / Arguments and Facts. February 20, 2011.Number 8 (1113). 
Monroe Price. Television, telecommunications, and the transition period. Moscow:Moscow University Publishing House, 2011. 
Osovski M. Deregulation of the media. / / Http://www.ruj.ru/osovsky.htm 
Electronic media: current state and development. Abstracts of scientific conference.Spb., 2011. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arsuken E.. // Российская газета. 27.11.2001. № 232.

Васильев  А.А. Государственное управление. Курс лекций. М., 2009.

Ворошилов В.В. Правовые и эстетические нормы  в журналистике. Спб., 2009.

Ворошилов В.В. История журналистики России. Спб., 2009.

Кодзасова И. Кто на ТВ хозяин. // Аргументы и  факты. 20 февраля 2011. № 8 (1113).

Монро Прайс. Телевидение, телекоммуникации и переходный период. М.:  Издательство Московского университета, 2011.

Осовский  М. Дерегулирование в сфере СМИ. // http://www.ruj.ru/osovsky.htm

Электронные СМИ: современное состояние и развитие. Тезисы научно-практической конференции. Спб., 2011